| Thi' Captain Spake |
Jabb'r: Team leader vote. |
's many 's 41 answ'rs
|
|
|
Quote ( Richard Robin Paukson @ October 8th 2021,09:10:34 ) Maybe we could give the leader a chance to move people up or down? With some limitations, of course.
That could solve the potential issues described by OP in the simplest way
For example by allowing to "assign a new spot" to 1 member of the team, not to reorder the whole team.
And maybe also limited by time, say "once per x seasons" or something like that.
Quote ( Jason Claydon @ October 8th 2021,09:41:45 ) I believe having a vote is more democratic than the number 2 inheriting.
IF the teamleader had the ability to change the order in some manner, the team can still have a democratic (teamforum and/or pm) vote before anything is done.
Quote ( Christopher Jones @ October 8th 2021,09:47:30 ) the number 2 guy put his or her time in and active. because they don't talk to you doesn't mean they don't talk to the leader.
In that case the teamleader already knows that the nr. 2 guy is active and is in a position to evaluate IF there is need for change of order or not.
ps. personally I've never faced such issues, but I can imagine what it might be like
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Mikko Heikkinen @ October 8th 2021,17:20:20 ) IF the teamleader had the ability to change the order in some manner, the team can still have a democratic (teamforum and/or pm) vote before anything is done.
Presuming the team leader was active yes. I only suggested an automatic vote to try and cut to the heart of any issues as I felt this being known as the norm would not involve any thought process other than stepping down from leadership and then the team voting.
Quote ( Mikko Heikkinen @ October 8th 2021,17:20:20 ) ps. personally I've never faced such issues, but I can imagine what it might be like
I suspect top teams rarely encounter this so much as they are well run, but at one point my current and last team were top teams and had the potential of the issue in both.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Erik Harken @ October 8th 2021,16:33:20 ) Yes good suggestion, I have one question though. How do we manage this situation when whole team is either dormant or inept? Asking for a friend
You leave! Sorry, "they" leave!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Rafael Mantovani @ October 8th 2021,19:53:09 ) pONA
Lol Rafa :P
|
|
|
|
If the TL leaves, there could be a poll to elect the new TL.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Jason Claydon @ October 8th 2021,09:41:45 ) our team is casual in nature
Quote ( Jason Claydon @ October 8th 2021,06:25:49 ) The manager in number 2 slot is active but dormant (Not answering messages)
So fits right in your "casual" .)
Quote ( Jason Claydon @ October 8th 2021,06:25:49 ) and should something happen to our team leader their is a chance that the team might turn zombie.
IF the teamleader had the option to "assign a new spot to 1 member" (let's say once per 3 seasons), That way the teamleader could put a more active member to nr, 2 spot in case of pending doom,
And review the choice every few seasons.
Quote ( Stephen Brooks @ October 8th 2021,15:04:48 ) Some teams alternate leadership each season and this is such a pain as everyone needs to move down one
This would solve also that. IF someone's being a left-handed monkey wrench, the teamleader could potentially change his/her spot while the rest would move on their own accord.
Quote ( Jason Claydon @ October 8th 2021,19:14:06 ) Presuming the team leader was active yes.
Well now you're heading to territory which is quite different than you originally posted. Now you're starting to suggest that the team already is "zombie", including the teamleader and other members.
In that scenario it starts to be difficult to imagine a "voting scenario" which would save anything without having possible counterproductive outcomes
Quote ( Ricardo Antunes @ October 8th 2021,10:27:04 ) I think game mechanics that are to be implemented should have the assumption that all teams are working properly (as in no "dictatorships" or dramas inside it) and so changes should be made according to that.
For which reason I do think that the fairly simple solution of letting assign spot to one member could solve most potential issues.
And functioning teams can organize votes for it IF they so choose.
That said: Sure there could be some elaborate automatic vote system, but that seems overkill and potentially pointlessly complicated with sets of rules in attempt to avoid abusive scenarios
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Mikko Heikkinen @ October 8th 2021,21:52:30 ) So fits right in your "casual" .)
Our definition of casual might be different. There is no obligation in the team, so in that you are correct, but of course at team leader level that becomes an issue.
Quote ( Mikko Heikkinen @ October 8th 2021,21:52:30 ) Well now you're heading to territory which is quite different than you originally posted. Now you're starting to suggest that the team already is "zombie", including the teamleader and other members.
I have used my current team situation (originally) as an example to highlight what I feel is a potential issue in all teams. I am not constantly referring to our own situation, but the issue as a whole.
Quote ( Mikko Heikkinen @ October 8th 2021,21:52:30 ) In that scenario it starts to be difficult to imagine a "voting scenario" which would save anything without having possible counterproductive outcomes
Well yes, that idea is to stop it getting to that point.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Jason Claydon @ October 8th 2021,22:01:30 ) Well yes, that idea is to stop it getting to that point.
The way I see it...
Your suggestion is actually to try to deal with situation after part of the team has already gone "zombie"
Where as my approach is to pre-emptively address the situation, making adjustments to the team structure before it goes that far
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Mikko Heikkinen @ October 8th 2021,22:11:12 ) The way I see it...
Your suggestion is actually to try to deal with situation after part of the team has already gone "zombie"
Where as my approach is to pre-emptively address the situation, making adjustments to the team structure before it goes that far
I am not against your proposal as such, but how much do we need a pre-empt if there is a default vote when the leader steps down, and could this be abused by the current leader taking democracy asway from the team?
Quote ( Mikko Heikkinen @ October 8th 2021,21:52:30 ) That said: Sure there could be some elaborate automatic vote system, but that seems overkill and potentially pointlessly complicated with sets of rules in attempt to avoid abusive scenarios
And I am not sure how elaborate the voting system would have to be. I see something akin to the voting out process, but maybe with just most votes and then based on current team position.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Jason Claydon @ October 8th 2021,22:17:51 ) And I am not sure how elaborate the voting system would have to be
Even at it simplest it's still more elaborate than the teamleader having the option to assign a new spot.
Because that "assigning" would be something similar to what we have at driver/TD market, moving offers up/down, just with dropdown menu to assing spot 2-10.
Would just need a time limiter or "X seasons" to prevent switching around constantly, but that kind of thing can be found from (let's say) profile picture swaps and maybe from team-livery swaps (if the latter isn't manual)
The teams which wanna live in dictatorships could have the teamleader simply choose nr. 2 guy, where as more democratic teams could arrange their internal votes themselves
And it would leave the option to let seniority to play it's part without "forcing" people to vote for the person who is already in line for the vacancy
Point is: This would leave the decision of how to proceed to the team in question, not "force" them to any format.
However... I do recognize that there could be misuse possibilities that I just haven't thought of :)
Quote ( Jason Claydon @ October 8th 2021,22:17:51 ) I see something akin to the voting out process, but maybe with just a majority.
This would immediately make it more complex, both from policy (1) aspect as well as from programming view.
(1) what would constitute as majority, how to make sure small teams would not be disadvantaged by this and/or that there wouldn't be allotted relatively more "power" to members of small teams
ps. I don't really know much about this topic or the suggestion, never faced situations like that. But I can imagine the situation.
So... I'm just putting some thoughts in writing, some of it might make sense, some of it might not :)
|
|
|
|
Sorry for the late reply Mikko, I am rarely on here between races now.
Having built and maintained a couple of websites, and having a lot of experience in excel VB/VBA coding I personally would not have any issue creating a trigger event that sparked a team vote should someone step down from leadership. I don’t see this as complex.
However I do agree, there are some implications around this that would require thought.
But ultimately I am not advocating my system over yours or any other, I see an issue here that destabilises teams and can kill them off, which IMO is avoidable, and any system that had some positive over this I would whole heartedly back.
I am sure Vlad is more qualified and experienced than either of us to implement any solution, If he see it worthy of doing so, all I can say is from someone that has been in the situation of the team potentially going dormant twice, it is very hard for that team to plan and puts a lot of stress on the internals of that team as a result.
|
|
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Română
Italiano
Português
Português
Français
Polski
Русский
Български
Македонски
Српски
Nederlands
Vlaams
Suomi
Lietuvių
Čeština
Magyar
Eesti keel
Slovenčina
Türkçe
Shqip
Ελληνικά
Hrvatski
Bahasa Melayu
Dansk
